New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1887-09-16
TIE ROYALTST MANIFESTO.

The Count of Paris writes his own mani
fcstocs. The essay on constitutional monarchy
which he has addressed to the French people
was not dictated by the leaders OF the reac-
tionary group in the Chambers. They would
have cautioned him against premature dis
QUESTIONS the precise form OF future
monarchical institutions. They would have
warned him against alarming the nation by
premonitions of evil and have bcsought him
to arouse feeling Of enthusiasm for the
Royalist cause. The Count OF Paris is
historian and philosopher, but poor poll
tician. lie writes a manifesto, which is OK
pected to electrify the French people, with
the judicial gravity and studied moderation
with which he would discuss a chapter Of
military history or the tendencies OF trades
unions. He foresees the necessity OF adapt
ing monarchy to new political conditions and
outlines a constitutional scheme which does
not differ materially from Louis Philippe's.
At the same time he warns the nation that
there cannot be a peaceful transition from
the republic to this reformed monarchy. and
that one Of those violent crises which seem
TO be of periodical character in French history
is to be apprchendcd. In this respect the
manifesto is admirably fitted to rcprcss grow
ing ardor for a change Of Government. 1t will
excite alarm, and prejudice the conservative
classes against the progress OF reaction. III
the Pretender himself despairs Of reganing
the throne without revolution and scenes OF
mob violence there is little cause for popu-
lar movement i'm favor of the restoration OF
monarchy.
Montesquieu shrewdly remarks that it is
poor praise to tell King that he plays the
flute well. With equal force it may be said
that literary accomplishments and philosophic
habits of reflection are incongruous in Royal
list Pretcndcr. IL the monarchy is to be restored
man of action is needed, and not book
writer on constitutional history. There is not
a line in the manifesto that reveals the man
of action. II is the essay of a Royalist pedant
who shirks the responsibilities Of courageous
leadership and speculates in safe retirement
upon contingencies that will never occur.
1t is proclamation that will excite amaze
ment among sober minded Republicans In
France that it was ever considered necessary
to interrupt the Counts innocent study oil
pamphlets on political economy at Cannes
and to cxpel the Oreanists, root and branch,
from their native heath. Neither he nor his
unoles and cousins have in them the material
for Royal Pretenders. They do not know
how to plot and intrigue for throne. They
are as ignorant as Louis Philippe himself was
of the art of making themselves popular and
Of inspiring enthusiasm for monarchy.
The manifesto serves one useful purpose.
1t shows that while the Count Of Paris stands
as the heir of the Bourbons for the principle
Of absolute monarchy, he considers it hope
less cause. limited monarchy based on a
popular vote and the action of the Constituent
Assembly is the only substitute for republic
which he ventures TO propose. 1t is the
grandson of Louis Philippe, not the heir OF
the Count of Chambord who writes this
manifesto; and while cautiously revising the
Orlcanist scheme of Parliamentary govern
mcnt, he cannot repress his horror Of revolu-
| ton. 1t brings TO remembrance fussy King
| Pear, who when asked to reward politician
with Office for aiding in putting HIM on the
throne, sagely remarked: 81 would rather
give the post to man who is not revolu-
| Zionist -